JaggedAppliance wrote:The rating system has a couple of serious problems. The first problem is the rating of new players. Because of how the displayed rating is calculated, you are very likely get a negative rating when you start playing FAF. No one wants to have a negative rating, it's surely a bad experience for a new player. My suggestion would be to hide a players rating completely both ingame and out for the first X number of games, until it is vaguely accurate.

The second problem also relates to new players. New ladder players are still matched with people around 1300/1400. They should have a wide range of players they can be matched with for their first game(s) so that they can quickly and easily start playing FAF. Players with low ladder ratings generally should have a pretty wide rating range that they can be matched against. Right now their first game has to be against a 1300/1400 and this is really bad. It makes it difficult to get the first game which really needs to be the easiest to get, and when they get it they get wrecked. The next game will be against a 1000/1100 and they will get crushed again. Whatever fix was implemented did not work at all. I have checked several players' ladder history in the vault to confirm this.

Shouldn't the ladder matchmaker assume new players have a rating of 0? or maybe 500 and have the range it will search for of under 800 or something? It certainly is demoralizing if you get crushed a bunch of times initially, and it also seems a pretty bad assumption that a brand new player would have that rating. The current system is probably only helpful for smurfs...which doesn't seem like a good thing.

One funny point relevant specifically to gieb/suzuji all welcome farming is how if somebody disconnects/dies, regardless whose team they are in its a win situation, enemy ofc good for you, even average players suck at managing double base, not mentioning noobs, and if its your own team then you are happy to get a base (senton ofc full share) that you can manage 94589045934% more efficiently.

I dont think you can fix new player ladder any way except only matching them with low ranks first (so assuming rating of 0). Smurfing cant be fixed any way and its pointless to try to prevent it by mismatching new players, antismurfing should be done by client not ingame (like steam linking).

And global rating I think should show won/lost ratio until rating it accurate because at start its inaccurate and just jumps every match and noone knows where to put them and vs who while win loss ratio might say something about how good someone is.

In fact I think rating should be determined by how much total damage you do to units in game compared to other players or something like that not whether you win (because a losing player can be good).

FAF client needs better introduction for new players. As I said already on first launching it show a tutorial on how to use it (not a video because they will tldr).

Too many games have been people fighting against each other where they keep building, killing, rebuilding fire bases to think "total damage" is something to consider.

Mach, you say that some people " don't do anything the entire game but kill ACU;" well, perhaps they're preparing and plotting a strike the entire game to ensure a confirmed kill.

Many higher level players prefer to eco and get to the later stages of tech where it's far easier to kill an ACU. You can of course do it at all stages, but chances are a group of percies are going to take an ACU down rather a hoard of t1.

The person who makes the right move at the right time wins games far more than any others.

1. 1st game for new players on ladder should match them vs anyone up to 1300 so they can get their first game asap. Subsequent games should also have a very wide range for matching.

2. Rating should be hidden for the first 5-10 games.

3. I think allowing ladder games to affect global rating again would be a good change, especially for new players who have an absolutely horrible time getting into custom games while they have no rated games.

"and remember, u are a noob, u don’t have any rights to disagree" - Destructor

What is the difference between showing low rating and low number of games and hiding it? The host will be smart enough to deduce this is a new player and probably not very good. So why would he behave differently??? How does he know which player to put vs which if he doesnt know if two players with hidden score have the same rating or 500 points difference???

Doesnt seem like sound logic, nor does your post show that you read what others have said. Seems more like you complain that some people have higher rating than what you think they should have and that you have this idea of yours already in your mind and dont care what others are saying.

All you really are saying is that ladder rating should count for global rating. In that case i think you have to give players the option to play Eq an Bh balance ladder games. Are you prepared to implement this? If not why not?